On the other hand, Bobbie, school/student use of computers tends to be very simple and basic. With the shift towards everything being web-centric, even what we think of as "office apps," nearly any computer that can reach a website is equal in power to any other. If a computer runs reliably, has a reasonably large screen (17 inch or up) and can run any modern browser, it's likely to meet 95% of the purposes a school or student would put it to.

The only need for current-generation computers is to run specialized current-generation software, such as audio, video and graphics software, perhaps CAD programs, and (for business classes) the ability to run current-generation MS Office and its equivalents.

New for the sake of new doesn't gain anything and it's an area in which the budget can be usefully controlled.

What software, run by whom?

ref, it sounds like you're talking through your hat a bit here. Most users including schools do NOT need the latest and greatest as a matter of course. A decently-built computer running anything from Windows XP forward is adequate (or can be made adequate, with very little effort) for all basic computer education as well as the light duty of office, tutorial and most educational software.

To turn that around, kids don't need a room full of maxed-out quad-core gaming machines to learn "keyboard skills" and basic application use.

There are users and classes that do need current-generation machines and software, but I'd guess that represents around 10 machines at the high-school level, perhaps 4-5 in middle school and 0-1 in elementary.

Given that school funds are limited, there are more sensible options than buying a whole school full of new computers. Sensible IT practice with limited funds is to repair, upgrade, rotate (systems down to less-demanding users) and buy new systems only where they are truly needed.

I'd be delighted to contribute my ~25 years of IT experience to the process but that experience has taught me that IT departments hate outside advice. :)

Jim G. - How old is your newest home computer? I assume over 10 years?

No, but my oldest is. I'm writing this on what may be one of the most sophisticated desktop systems in Tolland County, because I spend my work days running some of the heaviest of the heavy software to do the things I do.

But I have about a dozen computers throughout the house for various users and purposes, and some are seven to eight years since their last significant upgrade, with parts a few years older than that.

No mistake, computers reach a point of obsolescence, usually the point at which they can't run a new enough operating system to run useful software. But a computer that was powerful enough to run a browser, MS Office and educational software in 2005 is still powerful enough to run those things.

If we had the budget to upgrade our school computers by the hundred, I wouldn't be engaging this discussion. We don't - and so we need a more cost-effective approach that discards the truly outdated, gives the needful minority powerful systems for specialized purposes, and gives each tier in between systems of appropriate capability and cost.

I can't find anything that says CCS testing will be digital (or anything else). Can you point me to something that lists the proposal?

Unfortunately another unfounded mandate that the taxpayers will have to fund. When will Connecticut residents wake up? Every day our freedom to choose is lessened. I have always supported our town services and the school budget, but it is nearly impossible to sustain under the present administration.....both on the state and federal levels. How sad.

@Tolland Mom 2: I don't think any administration (or party) has cornered the market on imposing responsibilities on public education. Check out this chart for a historical view: http://www.jamievollmer.com/pdf/the-list.pdf

The article outlines the century long errosion of our schools. As the author states in her summary, schools have been given the charge to raise rather than educate our children. If not now, then when, is the right time to change this dictate. I am not alone in my firm belief that our state and this country are heading in the wrong direction; a very dangerous future, socially, morally, and financially, lies ahead for us. It is our responsibility to do what is necessary for our children, rather than continue to kick the can down the road or ask others to do what we are capable, but unwilling, to do ourselves.

Diane & TM2... don't you think arguments like these are somewhat like complaining that they don't build highways to suit Model Ts any more?

There are a lot of valid arguments about what we're doing right and wrong in education, but the world has changed just a tad since 1912... and solutions have to deal with the here-and-now, not the then-and-I-wish.

I have a different perspective on Vollmer's List. I don't see it as "erosion"--- of course education needs to evolve as times and society change. It does become a political football, however. I do wish that parents and educators were the driving force, with the support of government and seems more the other way around.

I think it that one of the things it does illustrate is the fallacy of "local control". We have national (and state-level) expectations, rightfully so, but the resources to meet those expectations don't rise at the same rate. We get left scrambling for resources at the local level with imposssible funding models that fuel resentments rather than promote community.